patriotism

[Ian]

Patriotism does not require to you to take credit for others' heroics or others' atrocities. If you love your country, you are patriotic. If you are loyal to your country, you are patriotic. Neither one of those things requires you to think yourself better than anyone else, or take credit for other people's actions.

^^^ This.

[Coito ergo sum]

Impregnation of the last female on earth would not require rape. We have advanced somewhat in impregnation technology since the days of yore.

Not if the technology were accessible. But, we can assume in the example that we're talking about a calamitous situation and no such access to invitro fertilization apparatus is available.

The rightness or wrongness of given action always depends on the circumstances.

[Clinton Huxley]

Humanity is doomed. Bunch of damned dirty apes, extinction would be too good for us

[Feck]

Sweeping generalizations again. "X is always bad". Prove it.

Well I don't need to prove it do I! the idea that someone is better or worse because of an accident of birth is stupid ,a persons actions may or may not gain them respect but the country or the ancestry of their birth neither credits them or damns them .


I can neither be proud because I'm british nor should I be ashamed of that fact ....I do not take credit for Shackleton's heroics nor am I responsible for the golden temple massacre !

If you think it's always bad, you need to show that. I'd be interested in seeing just one absolute before I die.

I live in Scotland FFS If you threw a grenade through every window with a blue and white flag on it the average IQ would double !


It does not seem to matter to your opinion when i say that every time i ask a Patriot Scotsman about his opinions i find a racist does it ? FREEDUMB !

It does not seem to matter that EVERY person flying a George cross flag (excluding world cups maybe) is a racist !
I stand by my post Be proud of your actions (or ashamed of them ) But to say you stand for everything your country does is blinkered .

You want an ABSOLUTE example The Philippines , Invaded why ? Because some fuckwit Patriot thought Merika needed colonies !

FFS We had maps drawn up that made britain look twice the size it was right up until the 1950's . In the name of Patriotism you held witch trials (oops sorry communists not witches) To defend Patriotism is akin to defending the Inquisition or the Pope because he feels that the church (on balance, does more good than harm ) I'm surrounded by racists waving flags and claiming Patriotism . And Don't ever imply that because i will NOT wave a flag that I would not stand up for my neighbours and friends ! I just fail to see how defending their rights has got anything to do with invading other countries .


I have mentioned several examples of why Patriotism is bad it is just like Chauvinism The US(or great Britain)is better than other countries in exactly the same way that men are better than women .

[charlou]

This isn't a comment on "X is always bad", which is a side statement that can take the topic too far down a tangent ...



Expectations of love and loyal patriotism ... where does that lead? People are conscripted into war whether they support it or not. People who disagree with patriotism or who are considered 'unloyal' have been accused of being traitors and have lost their liberty and their lives.

[sandinista]

...also...the human race doesn't need to, or deserve to be saved, especially if it means raping a young girl.

Well, that is your value judgment of the human race, and not one that I share. I think the human race does need to be saved, and deserves to be saved.

I would suggest that forcing a male to provide sperm would be a better option than allowing a species to go extinct, by way of example.

But, that's the thing about value judgments and morality. There is no absolute right or wrong about it. One's opinion is one's opinion.

your example is still not valid. In fact, in the very sense that the only example you could come up with is so far fetched that proves in and of itself the very real absolute of the statement.

No, it's certainly valid. I mean, it is not a very likely example, but I don't need to come up with very likely examples to show that your statement is not absolute. I just need to come up with one that is even remotely possible. And, it is.

I might change it to something that may have likely happened in our hunter-gatherer past. Perhaps in the days when human clans were small family groups, and maintaining 20 or so people in the group was necessary to ensure survival of newborns into the next generation required that little choice be given in the decision to procreate. We may not understand that today, in that we do not live at the subsistence level, hunting and gathering, always a hair away from the death of the entire clan. However, it was probably very likely that disease or other calamities caused the death of several clan females at once, putting the clan at risk of its own extinction, unless a remaining female was "married" off to a fertile male of the clan. Is it absolutely wrong?

Think of the different morals. Marriage was common, a few thousand years ago, when a girl turned 12 or had puberty. Therefore, sex with 12 and 13 year old girls and boys at the time, which today would be considered rape in almost every country in the world, was commonplace. Were those "rapes" absolutely wrong?

...again, give me a real life, present day example and I'll listen...no "in the future when there are only one man and a 13 year old girl scenarios" thats really grasping at straws. Also, when I use the term rape I mean not consenting, pretty straightforward no matter how you try to dress it up.

[Hermit]

Patriotism ... means you love or are devoted to your country, or are loyal to it.

If you didn't have any patriotism, however, you'd not have any care for the vast majority of people in your country.

Patriotism is not a thing that exists in and of itself. It's an emotion or a sentiment, which is created in the human brain and applied to a situation.

I loathe patriotism because it blocks the development of feelings of love, loyalty and solidarity in relation to where it ought to matter: fellow human beings. Isn't it about time we realise that the majority of us - wage earners, salary earners and all other ordinary people - have more in common with our counterparts in other nations than with those that wield power, the few whose main activities are to maximise wealth with shrewd share transactions, creating hedge funds, gamble on currency predictions and mass producing assault rifles for their own personal benefit?

Patriotism doesn't just pop up spontaneously. It is a device that economic and political empire builders have learnt to use with alacrity to get their underlings to do the dirty work for them. Herman Göring explained it like this:

• Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. ...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

At its core, patriotism is the number one hindrance to humanism exactly because it focuses on the concept of nationhood rather than humanity at large.

P.S. Coito, I am not trying to single you out for criticism. I used the snippets from your posts because they seem appropriate to contextualise what I wanted to say.

[sandinista]

good post Seraph.

[Feck]

I fail to see how examples of possible situations in the very distant past or possible situations in the future have ANY bearing on the OP ,Nobody said that all acts of Patriotism are wrong ,Some times your country is right And trying to be humanitarian . My problem is when immoral or at least morally questionable acts are happily done and labelled as a patriotic and are some how raised to the status of a virtuous act because, moral questions aside ,they are Patriotic .
The examples I used were used to illustrate that point Patriotism just like Religion has ,is and will be used to elevate acts of horror to the status of virtue .

Patriotism is a device used to make others seem LESS important than us and to make our abuse of them easier .

If you think that there are bonds somehow more important that basic human rights because we share a country then frankly you are an idiot ,or have forgotten how easy we will turn on our neighbours in a civil war .

The concept of country as a reason to care for one human more than another is wrong .

The concept of Pride because you are born in one place not another is a fucking Joke

The fact that speculative anthropology can be used to explain WHY humans are tribal does in no way show how that is a good thing .

[Robert_S]

Pep Rally.

You know, pep rallies weirded me out in high school, and they've only gotten creepier in retrospect.

Pretty much sums up what I think of most people's patriotism.

It does seem to make a good counter-meme. If you see a distasteful meme on it's way, you can inspire resistance to it by bringing attention to the fact that it's from furrin' parts.

[Trolldor]

true, forgoing the argument of "good or bad", patriotism is truly a stupid concept.

Again, why?

There is no nobility in pride for the circumstances of your birth. There is nothing moral - not by any standard - about honoring and serving your country irrespective of how it operates. Patriotism is unquestioned loyalty, it is faith and assumption and subservience.
Any moral act done is as effective without patriotism as it is without religion, and is as equally possible.

[Clinton Huxley]

Apparently, I should be patriotic towards the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I'm not much fussed about Norn Ireland, though, would happily sell it to the Chinese if it would raise a few bob.

SCotland? It's ok, some of my ancestors were from there but I feel no particular loyalty to it. I would be depressed at the pathetic tribalism if it became independent but would be otherwise un-moved.

Wales? Pffffff.

So, am I loyal to England? It's not really a country. You can't be an "English Citizen", there is no "English Passport" and I wouldn't want there to be.

So what is the country I should be loyal to? What practically do I do, on a day-to-day basis to display that loyalty? Can I be loyal to a political/geographical construct?

It would make as much sense to be loyal to irony or Sudoku as far as I can see.

[Coito ergo sum]

...also...the human race doesn't need to, or deserve to be saved, especially if it means raping a young girl.

Well, that is your value judgment of the human race, and not one that I share. I think the human race does need to be saved, and deserves to be saved.

I would suggest that forcing a male to provide sperm would be a better option than allowing a species to go extinct, by way of example.

But, that's the thing about value judgments and morality. There is no absolute right or wrong about it. One's opinion is one's opinion.

your example is still not valid. In fact, in the very sense that the only example you could come up with is so far fetched that proves in and of itself the very real absolute of the statement.

No, it's certainly valid. I mean, it is not a very likely example, but I don't need to come up with very likely examples to show that your statement is not absolute. I just need to come up with one that is even remotely possible. And, it is.

I might change it to something that may have likely happened in our hunter-gatherer past. Perhaps in the days when human clans were small family groups, and maintaining 20 or so people in the group was necessary to ensure survival of newborns into the next generation required that little choice be given in the decision to procreate. We may not understand that today, in that we do not live at the subsistence level, hunting and gathering, always a hair away from the death of the entire clan. However, it was probably very likely that disease or other calamities caused the death of several clan females at once, putting the clan at risk of its own extinction, unless a remaining female was "married" off to a fertile male of the clan. Is it absolutely wrong?

Think of the different morals. Marriage was common, a few thousand years ago, when a girl turned 12 or had puberty. Therefore, sex with 12 and 13 year old girls and boys at the time, which today would be considered rape in almost every country in the world, was commonplace. Were those "rapes" absolutely wrong?

...again, give me a real life, present day example and I'll listen...no "in the future when there are only one man and a 13 year old girl scenarios" thats really grasping at straws. Also, when I use the term rape I mean not consenting, pretty straightforward no matter how you try to dress it up.

Well, morality always depends on the facts, and if you narrow the facts to only OUR culture, then you artificially narrow the potential responses. In effect, you're saying: tell me how X is not a moral absolute, but only in the context of a society where X is viewed as immoral. You're basically tell me I need to answer the question, but only in a way you deem acceptable.

I gave you a situation that was not far fetched. It might occur today, in a hunter-gatherer tribe in Africa or a secluded tribe deep in the jungles of South America. I fail to see why I can't use those examples. If a tribe was hit by disease or something, and had to survive, perhaps it would be justified in doing what we in comfy cozy Western Europe or the US deem unthinkable.

It's kind of like the end of Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath, when Ma Joad directs her daughter to breastfeed a grown man. What would be moral? To tell a young girl she must breastfeed a dying man? Or, to allow her the choice of whether to do it, because she doesn't "owe" him anything?

[Coito ergo sum]

Apparently, I should be patriotic towards the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I'm not much fussed about Norn Ireland, though, would happily sell it to the Chinese if it would raise a few bob.

SCotland? It's ok, some of my ancestors were from there but I feel no particular loyalty to it. I would be depressed at the pathetic tribalism if it became independent but would be otherwise un-moved.

Wales? Pffffff.

So, am I loyal to England? It's not really a country. You can't be an "English Citizen", there is no "English Passport" and I wouldn't want there to be.

So what is the country I should be loyal to? What practically do I do, on a day-to-day basis to display that loyalty? Can I be loyal to a political/geographical construct?

It would make as much sense to be loyal to irony or Sudoku as far as I can see.

You don't HAVE to be loyal to, love or be devoted to a country. But, if you are, then you are patriotic. Maybe you're not patriotic, then. That's cool. To each his or her own.

[Coito ergo sum]

true, forgoing the argument of "good or bad", patriotism is truly a stupid concept.

Again, why?

There is no nobility in pride for the circumstances of your birth.

Nor do the circumstances of one's birth have any necessary bearing on whether one is patriotic. A permanent resident, non-citizen, of a country may well be patriotic toward that country. One can choose to be patriotic to a country.

There is nothing moral - not by any standard - about honoring and serving your country irrespective of how it operates.

Nobody said there was, nor is that required for patriotism. One need not UNCONDITIONALLY approve of all the actions of one's country in order to love it.

Patriotism is unquestioned loyalty,

No, it isn't. It's love, devotion or loyalty to a country. Nothing says one can't question one's country. Many patriots opposed the US entry into World War I, or the Vietnam War, for example.

it is faith and assumption and subservience.
Any moral act done is as effective without patriotism as it is without religion, and is as equally possible.

Sure, and patriotism is not a moral choice. It's love or devotion to one's country. That may require opposing governmental action from time to time.